JUDGMENT :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

All the appellants except John Miral Munda who is the appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 828 of 2017 are convicted and sentenced to RI for life and fine of Rs. 15,000/- under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code; RI for life and fine of Rs. 15,000/- under section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code; RI for ten years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- under section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act and; RI for two years under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Raja Tubid who is the appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 808 of 2017 suffered further sentence of RI for five years and fine of Rs. 5000/- under section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. John Miral Munda who was in judicial custody on the day of occurrence is convicted and sentenced to RI for life and fine of Rs. 15,000/- under section 302/120-B of the Indian Penal Code for murder of Gokul Gope in prosecution of criminal conspiracy.

4. Ganesh Dighi who is the appellant No. 4 in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 707 of 2017 died in December 2020 and on an application filed by the State this criminal appeal qua him was dismissed as abated vide order dated 20th October 2021.

5. Gokul Gope was a union leader at ACC factory, Jhinkpani in the district of Chaibasa presently falling in the state of Jharkhand. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons hatched a criminal conspiracy and committed murder of Gokul Gope in the early morning of 09th April 2012 at the shop of Sanjit Ram where he had gone for shoe polishing. Mannu Gope who accompanied Gokul Gope to the shop of cobbler gave his statement before Sakaldeep Singh, Officer-in-Charge of Jhinkpani PS, at 07:15 AM on 09th April 2012 in which involvement of Raja Tubid, John Miral Munda, Dilip Munda, Jantur Munda, Madhu Gope, Tala Bari, Munna Kujur, Mangal Alda, Ganesh Dighi and Mangal Tubid was stated by him. The informant made a specific allegation against John Miral Munda that he was the main conspirator. Ram Charitra Ram who took over the charge of investigation prepared inquest report at 07:30 AM the same day and gave requisition for postmortem examination of the dead body of Gokul Gope. Besides other witnesses, Basanti Devi and Mithun Gope were examined during the investigation and their statements under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded by the Judicial Magistrate.

6. Binod Bari who was sitting near the cobbler's shop suffered injuries in the occurrence and was brought to ACC Hospital, Jhinkpani where Dr. Mahendra Biruli, Deputy Manager of Health Services treated him.

7. Dr. Binod Kumar Pandit who conducted autopsy has recorded in the postmortem report that injury No. I found on the dead body was a blast injury and injury Nos. II and III were caused by firearm.

8. The appellants faced the trial on the charge under sections 302/34, 324/34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substance Act and section 27 of the Arms Act and to prove these charges the prosecution examined fifteen witnesses.

9. The initial case of the prosecution that many persons were present near the cobbler shop at around 06:45 AM on 09th April 2012 suffered a serious jolt in the Court when PW4, PW5, PW6 and PW7 did not support the prosecution case – but, only PW4 was declared hostile. The learned counsels appearing for the appellants contend that the effect of several eyewitnesses turning hostile should necessarily be that they were planted witnesses and the prosecution did not reveal the true manner of occurrence.

10. As we understand in the legal parlance, a witness who resiles in the Court from his previous statement made before the Investigating Officer and does not support the prosecution is labeled as hostile witness. Section 154 of the Indian Evidence Act confers wide discretion in the Court and leaves it entirely to the Court to permit a party to call a witness to put any question to him which might be put in cross-examination by the opposite party. In the early years when the judicial op